|
Post by o on Aug 29, 2010 12:34:21 GMT 1
Does anyone else think the spirit of the game has gone now though Everyone reviewing stuff or refusing to walk when clearly bowled, etc No, I don't. The Pakistan players were generous in their congratulations to Trott and Broad when they went off at the end. And one of the Pakistan players (possibly Kamran Akmal ?) did walk when he got a snick, without waiting for the umpire's finger to go up. If anything, I think the review process will improve the spirit of the game. It gives players the opportunity to challenge those difficult decisions which, otherwise, might lead to confrontation and resentment if subsequently proved to be wrong. Exactly, one person walked, while the other 9 reviewed, well you know what I mean. It was the guy that was bowled who refused to walk, therefore saying the wicketkeeper had knocked the bails off, if the wicketkeeper says you're bowled, you walk. One of the England players got a nick in the last test as well and refused to walk. It's only regards wickets that the spirit seems to be lacking. I wonder if someone is keeping count of the number of reviews made against each umpire, and what the % rate of success is? ie who's the umpire that gets most decisions wrong?
|
|
|
Post by wonderwall on Aug 29, 2010 13:12:42 GMT 1
Pakistan all out 147 England win by innings and 225 runs no presentations which is unfair really to broad and trott last tour it was ball tampering now on this tour match fixing allegations .
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Aug 29, 2010 13:38:04 GMT 1
With all that's going on in Pakistan at the moment any player involved in any sort of match fixing is an absolute disgrace to his country.
|
|
|
Post by wonderwall on Aug 29, 2010 13:40:07 GMT 1
With all that's going on in Pakistan at the moment any player involved in any sort of match fixing is an absolute disgrace to his country. I agree Pakistan cricket is in a mess
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Aug 29, 2010 16:52:25 GMT 1
No, I don't. The Pakistan players were generous in their congratulations to Trott and Broad when they went off at the end. And one of the Pakistan players (possibly Kamran Akmal ?) did walk when he got a snick, without waiting for the umpire's finger to go up. If anything, I think the review process will improve the spirit of the game. It gives players the opportunity to challenge those difficult decisions which, otherwise, might lead to confrontation and resentment if subsequently proved to be wrong. Exactly, one person walked, while the other 9 reviewed, well you know what I mean. It was the guy that was bowled who refused to walk, therefore saying the wicketkeeper had knocked the bails off, if the wicketkeeper says you're bowled, you walk. One of the England players got a nick in the last test as well and refused to walk. It's only regards wickets that the spirit seems to be lacking. I wonder if someone is keeping count of the number of reviews made against each umpire, and what the % rate of success is? ie who's the umpire that gets most decisions wrong? Swann walked after being caught in this test as well. Of the 20 Pakistan wickets to fall in this match, 4 were unsuccessfully reviewed (the maximum allowed as each team has 2 unsuccessful reviews per innings). None were overturned after review, meaning Pakistan batsmen only reviewed 4 times. One wicket came off an England review after an lbw appeal was turned down. England also had one unsuccessful review while bowling. During England's only innings, three dismissals were successfully overturned by England, and one unsuccessfully. Pakistan managed to take a wicket via a review of their own and had a couple rejected. I make that 5 reviews out of 13 being successful in this match.
|
|